Posted by Anna Laura on February 20, 2002, at 9:07:52
In reply to Re: Anyone with transferance/counter-tran experience?, posted by Mark H. on February 19, 2002, at 10:04:02
> Dear Friend,
>
> First, my apologies for not having time this morning to read through all the replies already written.
>
> Judy, I think we all fall into two broad categories: those of us who are willing to look at our transference/counter-transference issues, and those who are in denial that they exist.
>
> I believe we create these situations because they are what we need to work on. If we have chosen our therapists wisely, then they hold the boundaries for us when ours dissolve and (for really skillful therapists) they test us to see if we will do the same.
>
> When there's clarity and no dependence, then we graduate, at least until we're ready for more assistance. I think taking breaks from therapy is analogous to resting between physical workouts, and just as crucial to success.
>
> The ideal state -- and we all achieve it at times -- is when we can be faced with inappropriate but powerful desire and opportunity, acknowledge and feel and even (verbally) express those primal urges and longings in a manner appropriate to the situation, and still maintain our values and impulse control in determining our behavior (including mental behavior as well as physical).
>
> Without desire and the opportunity to consummate it, we are still speculating, making predictions based almost solely on intellect, which often is a set-up for self-betrayal. We know we are winning when we can say "no" without denying our feelings, and do it out of love and respect for ourselves as well as the other person.
>
> I don't know if most therapists can handle this level of interaction -- professionally or personally. Yet regardless of technique and their own issues, I think a good therapist will lead us there to help us be strong on our own.
>
> With respect,
>
> Mark H.
Hi Mark
I just wanted to say i eventually met a good therapist years ago. I think he helped me a great deal and i still feel grateful. Nonetheless, i believe life could be a "setting" also,(as well as mail exchanging and relationships in general: consider Freud-Fliess correspondence: that was a therapeutic setting to me). I think it's Mertzel who said therapeutic setting is the "ideal" setting (not the only one) cause there are no disturbances and interferences (the movies metaphor ). Mertzel said that being in therapy it's just like being at the movies: the ambient being dark and silent you can clearly distinguish all the undergoing "projections" and processes.
Well, life it's much more "disturbed" (more noises and blurred visions in the background) but you still can distinguish and pinpoint "projections" and dynamics if you're trained enough. You don't necessarely need a therapist for that.
As a matter of fact, you don't necessarely need psychological theories in order to grow or mature. They can even be harmful at times, as you might end up endlessly ruminating and wasting your time.I'm aware it could sound just like a blasphemy for orthodox therapy's advocates, but
therapy it's not the only way to mature, grow or "graduate".
It's o.k. about being aware of our vulnerability and "dependance" : but i believe that putting too much emphasis on this issue could be counterproductive, like always seeking therapist's approval and advice, being basically unaware of that.
Being independent from the therapist doesn't necessarily mean not missing him or feeling comfortable without him: it's pretty much thinking with our own heads, not relying upon psychological or pseudo-scientific back-ups.
I notice that many people who have been in therapy and had a satisfactory therapeutic relationship (me included) tend to "introject" therapist personality's traits and views.
Partly it's an healthy process (you know like introjecting motherly and fatherly figures in order to build your own unique identity) but it's partly unhealthy also cause it could jeopardize your further growth in the long run.
It's like being "frozen", fixed to a certain stage of development and never moving away from that spot. It's like being insecure without the guiding star of psychological/psychoanalitic theories.
The paradox it's: the more you grow independent the more you "regress".
I'd really like to talk much more about that cause i believe it's a challenging and interesting issue, but, as i already said in my previous post to Trouble, my thinking is muddy right now. I just can't go any further, i get stuck somehow, (it's really frustrating cause i really wanted to join this debate).
I'd like to talk about James Hillman also (do anybody of you know him?).
Well, hope to hear from you soon.Best regards
Anna Laura
poster:Anna Laura
thread:18403
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20020214/msgs/18571.html